2008 réponses à ce sujet

[Lazy Jer]

Plaintiff wrote...

It would not be equivalent, the comparisons you made are completely different from the situation actually occuring in DA2. The Chantry is responsible for the Templars, and it is responsible for creating and perpetrating the culture of bigotry that mages live in.....

Meredith attacked a group in response to the actions of an unrelated individual. Anders attacked a group in response to the actions of that same group. There's a massive difference.

Whether the Chantry is a controlling arm of the Templar Order is beside the point.  The point that I can't help but notice you continually gloss over is that there is a really good chance that there were innocent people in the Chantry when Anders blew the thing up.  We're not talking about officials, Mothers, Sisters, Grand Cleric, etc.  We're talking about people who were just basic worshipers.  I am aware that you've stated that you don't see orphans, homeless, or sick people in the Chantry, but you do often see worshipers.  These are the innocents that people are referring to when they say that Anders killed innocent people.

So even if I were to subscribe to you're believe that the Chantry more or less equates to the Templar Order, then the only difference I see between Meredeth and Anders is that Meredeth was willing to take out Party A for the actions of Party B, whereas Anders wanted to take out Party A for Party A's actions and was willing to take out Party B at the same time because he was in the way.

[Plaintiff]

Lazy Jer wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

It would not be equivalent, the comparisons you made are completely different from the situation actually occuring in DA2. The Chantry is responsible for the Templars, and it is responsible for creating and perpetrating the culture of bigotry that mages live in.....

Meredith attacked a group in response to the actions of an unrelated individual. Anders attacked a group in response to the actions of that same group. There's a massive difference.

Whether the Chantry is a controlling arm of the Templar Order is beside the point.  The point that I can't help but notice you continually gloss over is that there is a really good chance that there were innocent people in the Chantry when Anders blew the thing up.  We're not talking about officials, Mothers, Sisters, Grand Cleric, etc.  We're talking about people who were just basic worshipers.  I am aware that you've stated that you don't see orphans, homeless, or sick people in the Chantry, but you do often see worshipers.  These are the innocents that people are referring to when they say that Anders killed innocent people.

So even if I were to subscribe to you're believe that the Chantry more or less equates to the Templar Order, then the only difference I see between Meredeth and Anders is that Meredeth was willing to take out Party A for the actions of Party B, whereas Anders wanted to take out Party A for Party A's actions and was willing to take out Party B at the same time because he was in the way.

I don't gloss over it. I simply don't go around shrieking "ANDERS KILLED INVISIBLE ORPHANS BAWWW". We see maybe two or three "worshippers" maximum. If you ever paid attention to the cutscene, you'd know that we get to see the inside of the chantry when it starts to rumble, and there's I can count on one hand the amount of people inside at that moment.

Sure, Anders may've killed some "innocent woshippers". So what? I didn't know them and I don't feel bad for them. I despise the Chantry, so why should I have sympathy for anyone who subscribes to it's disgusting doctrine?

You might as well ask me to shed a tear at a bombing of the Westboro Baptist Church. It ain't gonna happen.

[Lazy Jer]

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't gloss over it. I simply don't go around shrieking "ANDERS KILLED INVISIBLE ORPHANS BAWWW". We see maybe two or three "worshippers" maximum. If you ever paid attention to the cutscene, you'd know that we get to see the inside of the chantry when it starts to rumble, and there's I can count on one hand the amount of people inside at that moment.

Sure, Anders may've killed some "innocent woshippers". So what? I didn't know them and I don't feel bad for them. I despise the Chantry, so why should I have sympathy for anyone who subscribes to it's disgusting doctrine?

You might as well ask me to shed a tear at a bombing of the Westboro Baptist Church. It ain't gonna happen.

As enlightening as that is, your sympathy or lack thereof isn't really at issue.  What is at issue is the similarity between Anders and Knight-Commander Meredeth.  Mer had an extreme (to avoid confustion extreme should be taken to mean "unwavering and/or uncomprimising") possition about magic.  Anders had an extreme possition about the Circle of Magi.  Mer was being possessed by an entity that twisted and enhanced those feelings.  Anders was being possessed by an entity that similarly effected his opinions (i.e. justice).  Lastly, Meredeth, in the end was willing to cause death on a massive scale (the entire Circle of Magi), as was Anders (the entire Chantry).  That is, from what I can remember, what the OP's original point was.

I happen to agree.  Furthermore I haven't seen anyone show me a convincing argument against that ascertion.

Edit:  I will also have you know that I have never shrieked the word "bawww" in my entire life, thank you very much.

Modifié par Lazy Jer, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:23 .

[GavrielKay]

Lazy Jer wrote...
The point that I can't help but notice you continually gloss over is that there is a really good chance that there were innocent people in the Chantry when Anders blew the thing up.

Not speaking for anyone else, but a major part of the reason that I personally "gloss over" the loss of innocent life in the Chantry is that those people were free to be wherever they wanted to.  They were able to choose to be in the Chantry at that moment.

For 900 years the mages haven't had that freedom.  They have to choose between being a fugitive (if they can even escape) or being wherever the Circle system chooses to allow them to go.

In the face of 900 years of oppression, I can "gloss over" a lot of bad behavior.  The Chantry has no one but itself to blame for what happens in Kirkwall.  They allowed 900 years of fear mongering and inertia to create Anders, and Meredith too for that matter.  How many innocent mages lived and died under that system without ever being able to choose a darned thing?  Without being able to love and have families?  I'll bet it's a lot more than the death toll from Anders' explosion.

To each his own and all that, but I find the Chantry / Templar / Circle system morally indefensible.  And like I said, I can forgive an awful lot from someone who is fighting against it.

[Plaintiff]

Lazy Jer wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't gloss over it. I simply don't go around shrieking "ANDERS KILLED INVISIBLE ORPHANS BAWWW". We see maybe two or three "worshippers" maximum. If you ever paid attention to the cutscene, you'd know that we get to see the inside of the chantry when it starts to rumble, and there's I can count on one hand the amount of people inside at that moment.

Sure, Anders may've killed some "innocent woshippers". So what? I didn't know them and I don't feel bad for them. I despise the Chantry, so why should I have sympathy for anyone who subscribes to it's disgusting doctrine?

You might as well ask me to shed a tear at a bombing of the Westboro Baptist Church. It ain't gonna happen.

As enlightening as that is, your sympathy or lack thereof isn't really at issue.  What is at issue is the similarity between Anders and Knight-Commander Meredeth.  Mer had an extreme (to avoid confustion extreme should be taken to mean "unwavering and/or uncomprimising") possition about magic.  Anders had an extreme possition about the Circle of Magi.  Mer was being possessed by an entity that twisted and enhanced those feelings.  Anders was being possessed by an entity that similarly effected his opinions (i.e. justice).  Lastly, Meredeth, in the end was willing to cause death on a massive scale (the entire Circle of Magi), as was Anders (the entire Chantry).  That is, from what I can remember, what the OP's original point was.

I happen to agree.  Furthermore I haven't seen anyone show me a convincing argument against that ascertion.

No they aren't the same. You keep harping on their one similarity, which still isn't much of a similarity at all, and ignoring the many ways in which they are different.

Their differing goals are an important point that people just brush aside with stupid generalizations like "the end doesn't justify the means". I wonder, have these people looked at the end? The Chantry is an undeniably abusive entity, and not just to mages, even if mages are Anders' primary concern. It's been abusive for the last thousand years, and it continues to be abusive into the present day in which the games are set. It needs to be done away with. 

Anders examined his options rationally, which Meredith never did. He spent seven years working in secret to undermine the templars, writing his manifestos to garner support via reason and sense, tyring to sway public opinion by proving himself to be charitable and hardworking man. He wasted the better part of a decade trying to find a peaceful way to effect the necessary social change and got nowhere. People keep spouting bull**** about other things he could or should've done. He did them already. And he shouldn't have bothered. He lives in a world where he'll be mindraped into mindlessness or killed outright for merely existing outside of a prison, let alone spreading his subersive newsletter. Restraint is a luxury that he simply cannot afford.

Anders has every right to be extreme, his life is actually in constant danger. He had nothing to gain by taking some arbitrary moral high ground and everything to lose.

By contrast, Meredith, a woman living comfortably in a position of power, abuses said position to gain even more power, ignores the corruption and abuses of the men under her command, bullies and harangues her mage charges when she has no evidence of wrongdoing and justifies it all with delusional fantasies of maleficar under her bed. Meanwhile, real blood mages terrorise the city and the surrounding area and she does nothing.

[Lazy Jer]

GavrielKay wrote...

Not speaking for anyone else, but a major part of the reason that I personally "gloss over" the loss of innocent life in the Chantry is that those people were free to be wherever they wanted to.  They were able to choose to be in the Chantry at that moment.

For 900 years the mages haven't had that freedom.  They have to choose between being a fugitive (if they can even escape) or being wherever the Circle system chooses to allow them to go.

In the face of 900 years of oppression, I can "gloss over" a lot of bad behavior.  The Chantry has no one but itself to blame for what happens in Kirkwall.  They allowed 900 years of fear mongering and inertia to create Anders, and Meredith too for that matter.  How many innocent mages lived and died under that system without ever being able to choose a darned thing?  Without being able to love and have families?  I'll bet it's a lot more than the death toll from Anders' explosion.

To each his own and all that, but I find the Chantry / Templar / Circle system morally indefensible.  And like I said, I can forgive an awful lot from someone who is fighting against it.

Well, again, the original point of the post wasn't to compare the death tolls of Mages vs. Mage Opressors.  That would take too long and would require digging into the entire history of the Tevinter Empirium as well as the abuses of the Templar Order and such.  

The original point of the post was the actions of Meredeth specifcally vs. the actions of Anders specifically and the factors that effected them.  I maintain my own opinion that the two, minus the history of Thedas, are very similar.

They both have very extreme points of view on their chosen cause.  Meredeth is an ardent supporter of the idea that magic and mages need to be controlled.  Anders is an ardent supporter of abolishing the Circle of Magi.  They both have experienced problems in their past history that has lead them to this stance.  I Meredeth had gotten severely screwed over in some way by magic users (I forget her story offhand, so if anyone can fill in that blank, that'd be great).  Anders had grown up in the Circle of Magi, told he was inherently evil by virtue of his magic, and that is how he formed his position.  They both have had their opinions twisted/enhanced by an external force, the lyrium idol for Meredeth and "Justice" for Anders. 

The major sticking point in the comparison, correct me if I'm wrong, is the issue of just how innocent the lives that were lost in Anders' explosion vs. Meredeth's proposed Right of Annulment.  Thus I won't mention the issue of innocent lives lost...save to say that they both cost innocent lives, in my opinion.

The reason I previously said that the supporting or ending of the oppressive regime didn't matter is because Anders and Meredeth are very similar in the core personalties.  Leaving alone their goals, and even leaving alone the idol and Justice, that their core personalities are very similar.

Whether the ends justify the means...I have opinions on that, but I won't go into them as they're not actually important to the discussion.

[Lazy Jer]

(This post deleted because I realized I'm taking this whole thing too seriously)

Modifié par Lazy Jer, 21 janvier 2012 - 11:21 .

[GavrielKay]

Lazy Jer wrote...
The reason I previously said that the supporting or ending of the oppressive regime didn't matter is because Anders and Meredeth are very similar in the core personalties.  Leaving alone their goals, and even leaving alone the idol and Justice, that their core personalities are very similar.

Whether the ends justify the means...I have opinions on that, but I won't go into them as they're not actually important to the discussion.

To each their own.  I think motivations and goals matter a great deal.  I don't think all ends justify all means, but some ends truly are worth extreme means. 

Maintaining an oppressive regime is, in my opinion, not a moral goal to have.  Thus I do not support the use of violence to do so.  I wouldn't support the use of strong language to maintain such a regime, let alone beatings, Tranquiling and death.  When the goal itself is immoral, then the means used to achieve it can seldom be considered moral either.  So, as far as I'm concerned, Meredith's morality is off from the very beginning. 

Anders on the other hand, tries lots of alternatives before finally realzing that freedom for an entire class of people is worth actually fighting for.  He has moral goals and thus the means used to achieve the goals have a higher chance of being considered morally acceptable as well.

Obviously people draw the line of how far you're supposed to go at different places.  I think violence against an oppressive regime is acceptable.  Therefore I find Anders' actions acceptable.

So, to address the topic of the thread:  Meredith is immoral, Anders is moral (IMHO of course) and thus they are very different people.

[dragonflight288]

Jer, you asked for a summary of Meredith's backstory so here goes.

She and her family were once like the Hawke's. She was protecting her apostate sister. Unlike the Hawke's, she had no family member who had training in magic, so her sister was on her own, unlike Bethany and Hawke(?) with Malcolm.

One day, Meredith's sister turned into an abomination, slaughtered their whole family and then proceeded to kill 70 people before she was killed by the templars.

Meredith saw magic as a great force of destruction, and mages absolutely NEED to be in the Circle to protect the world from Mages.

Personally, I think she honestly forgot part of the job description is also protecting mages from the world, a world full of prejudice against mages.

The Chantry helps people fear magic and all mages, calling them evil because of something they were born with and not because of any choice they made themselves. But I honestly think the prejudice would be there irregardless of the Chantry. Just not as strong because the Chantry teaches if the mages, who live in a completely different political culture than exists in Tevinter, well it will be inevitable that they'll become another Tevinter. I whole heartedly disagree.

[Lazy Jer]

Thanks, Dragonflight.

[dragonflight288]

No problem.

[Urzon]

There were plenty of other ways to take out the Grand Cleric. Anders could have poisoned her. He could have worked a spell that would cause her death. Heck, he could have saved up some money and hired the Crows. They were right there in Act 3.

But no, he had to do the worst possible thing and plant a magical bomb in the Chantry. He had to do something so big, so flashy, and so destructive that it would put a even bigger fear of magic back into the populace. It would show them once again why the mages deserve to be put into the Circle.

It would show them that one mage had to power to stike at the heart of their city. One single mage had to power to utterly destroy the Chantry, killing the well loved (by the people) Grand Cleric and everyone inside.

If one mage could do all of that, what do you expect will happen when people hear that the Circles broke away from the Chantry, and they have started an army? Fear on a massive scale.

One step forward, 50 steps back.

Modifié par Urzon, 22 janvier 2012 - 06:33 .

[TEWR]

Urzon wrote...

There were plenty of other ways to take out the Grand Cleric. Anders could have poisoned her. He could have worked a spell that would cause her death. Heck, he could have saved up some money and hired the Crows. They were right there in Act 3.

Wouldn't have solved anything. The Grand Cleric wasn't his target. The entire line of priests eligible for authority over the RoA was.

To that end, he needed them all dead, or at least the majority so that it would be hard to find any other priests. Killing Elthina just means a subordinate takes her place. It doesn't solve anything. He needed most of them to be dead because he knew Meredith was cuckoo for cocoa puffs and he wanted her to begin an unjustified Annulment.

That said, I find that to be a very weak part of the story -- not the act of blowing up the Chantry as I happened to like that, but the dialogue that followed it -- because there isn't any moral ambiguity there.

But no, he had to do the worst possible thing and plant a magical bomb in the Chantry. He had to do something so big, so flashy, and so destructive that it would put a even bigger fear of magic back into the populace. It would show them once again why the mages deserve to be put into the Circle.

It would show them that one mage had to power to stike at the heart of their city. One single mage had to power to utterly destroy the Chantry, killing the well loved (by the people) Grand Cleric and everyone inside.

If one mage could do all of that, what do you expect will happen when people hear that the Circles broke away from the Chantry, and they have started an army? Fear on a massive scale.

That bomb he made could easily be assembled by a non-mage. Any fool in Thedas could see that. All it took were some ingredients which do not require a mage.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 22 janvier 2012 - 06:55 .

[Urzon]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wouldn't have solved anything. The Grand Cleric wasn't his target. The entire line of priests eligible for authority over the RoA was.

To that end, he needed them all dead, or at least the majority so that it would be hard to find any other priests. Killing Elthina just means a subordinate takes her place. It doesn't solve anything. He needed most of them to be dead because he knew Meredith was cuckoo for cocoa puffs and he wanted her to begin an unjustified Annulment.

Which is all true, but has far along as Meredith was in crazy town; do you really think she would have accepted the authority of another Grand Cleric that wasn't Elthina? She has been trying to grab at any power she could in Kirkwall for a long while. The only reason she wasn't pressing for more control in the Chantry was probably because she respected Elthina so much. Since they has such a long history together.

No to mention after getting killed by a mage, the women that would have taken the role of Grand Cleric might find Meredith's actions (like the Annulment) more agreeable.

That bomb he made could easily be assembled by a non-mage. Any fool in Thedas could see that. All it took were some ingredients which do not require a mage.

I would say that anyone could make an explosive lyrium dust/sand fueled bomb if that had the ingredients. Bombs that shoot red lasers into the sky that break apart the building, then proceed to collect the rubble in midair before shooting it into the surrounding city and countryside? Clearly there is magic involved in the making of that.

[Gervaise]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Chantry helps people fear magic and all mages, calling them evil because of something they were born with and not because of any choice they made themselves. But I honestly think the prejudice would be there irregardless of the Chantry. Just not as strong because the Chantry teaches if the mages, who live in a completely different political culture than exists in Tevinter, well it will be inevitable that they'll become another Tevinter. I whole heartedly disagree.

Actually the political culture is very similar to that in Tevinter, at least in Orlais which is where the Chantry originated.   You have a political elite, the nobles, who regard themselves as divinely ordained to rule, and the rest who they feel justified in treating like dirt if they so choose.  In Tevinter, before their Chantry broke away and the mages come out into the open as the real rulers, they were already pulling the strings behind the scenes.  The only difference is that these were old established mage bloodline families so there were a lot more mages.  

I imagine that one reason the Chantry has been able to maintain the Circle System for so long in the rest of Thedas  is that:
(a) Nobles can actually ensure that their relatives are better treated once inside the Circles and are allowed to keep contact with them.   Their relatives having the normal viewpoint of the ruling elite are not bothered by the abuses to peasant mages.   I would imagine that templars are not the only ones involved in those abuses.  I would also guess that the majority of templars do come from the younger ranks of noble houses and so how they treat mages is only how the rest of their family treat peasants generally on the outside.

( Because the noble houses have less mage representatives than in Tevinter and some may have no mages at all, they are reluctant to allow mages to assume positions that could give a political opponent an advantage.    They also wish to ensure that the peasant classes are kept powerless, so they lock up any children that could give them an incentive and ability to rebel.

So without any sort of regulation, the nobles will utilise mages to consolidate their power.   Remember Tevinter has its own Circle System and it is claimed that mage children can be taken away from their families to be trained.   This would not be those in noble families who are well able to train their own but those of social subordinates.     To avoid the abuse and corruption of power by mages, you need to remove the abuse and corruption of power among the nobility.    You have to remember that it is suggested that not everyone in Orlais approved of the election of Dorothea as Divine and it is implied in Asunder that the attempt on her life by a mage was likely engineered by nobles/templars.

This is why currently the only place where I see the possibility of a better system emerging is in Ferelden, which already has a different social structure to places like Orlais.      If Alistair/Anora can knock something together (possibly with the agreement of the Divine), then hopefully it could form the pattern to be followed elsewhere.

[dragonflight288]

Gervaise, I don't disagree with you. The political differences I was referring to was that Tevinter has spent centuries building up magical bloodlines. They view magic differently there. It's a gift and an honor, and allows for a much quicker route to power than you could find elsewhere. And yes, even mages are slaves there, but they have a greater chance of escaping slavery in Tevinter than non-mages. Does happen though.

Outside of Tevinter, are a lot of nations that were ruled by mages, and see only the horror magic has unleashed. Ser Perth in Ferelden, probably the most liberal country on magic, would rather have a useless trinket with a Chantry symbol on it than an actual magical item that would help. It is referred often as unholy (Ser Bryant in Lothering, Ser Perth, Knight of Redcliff.) The attitude towards magic is considerably different, and that lies in the culture itself.

Granted, I absolutely agree concerning nobles.

[Vilegrim]

It'seasy to tell the difference: Anders attacked the guilty.

[Fast Jimmy]

Vilegrim wrote...

It'seasy to tell the difference: Anders attacked the guilty.

That's a naive and silly way to think about it.

You act like anyone in the Chantry building never did an ounce of good in their life, like they sat around dreaming up new ways to torture and kill mages.

[GavrielKay]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

It'seasy to tell the difference: Anders attacked the guilty.

That's a naive and silly way to think about it.

You act like anyone in the Chantry building never did an ounce of good in their life, like they sat around dreaming up new ways to torture and kill mages.

Sure, but you could say the same for the Chantry's treatment of mages...  they are locked up for life as though they'd never done anything good and sat around dreaming up new ways to become abominations and destroy villages.

I wouldn't say that every person in the Chantry deserved to die, but I do think the mages have suffered enough and collateral damage is just one of many lousy parts of war.

[Fast Jimmy]

I've already argued this point too many times (even in this very thread) to make me want to even think about doing it again.

However, there was no war. Anders blew up a building, then later took credit for it, spouting a reason for it. There was no formal declaration of war, no warning, no thought given to civilian casualties.

There's a word for that. And its not war.

[Killjoy Cutter]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

That bomb he made could easily be assembled by a non-mage. Any fool in Thedas could see that. All it took were some ingredients which do not require a mage.

That bomb was clearly beyond a simple explosive.  Mundane explosions don't act like that.

[Sylvianus]

Jesus.

That's the weakest argument I ever saw in this topic. Saying that stuff, " oh look, I saw only two priests npcs, so Anders killed only some priests, " is silly. It's Dragon Age II, this game was sloppy, rushed, you know it of course, but besides, that's just ridiculous. What you see in a game that can't have many npcs ( this one didn't even have a long development time ) isn't and will never be the true representation of what is the number of the crowd elsewhere, and especially in the chantry.

This is strictly silly to think that a church has no civilians, otherwise, the temples would be useless. And temples in the Middle Ages were full of people day and night. Anders did blow up the chantry in the end of the day, it wasn't even yet the night. There were children, civilians and priests. Yes he killed many people, sorry to break your innocent heart. ( I assume that you didn't want to consider this and didn't want to kill them )

Oh otherwise everybody can say that too : " Oh looooook, I saw only two children npcs in the circle of mages in DAO. So I can assume that I won't kill many children, only two and some mages, the other are almost all dead. I didn't see any mage, any child in the circle in DA2, I can assume that I won't kill many people " That's just ridiculous.
Yes Anders massacred many innocent people. And it's silly to say no because I saw only two NPCs.

Yep, I know, it is difficult to justify that. No one can justify mass murder when it targets  innocent victims. " Ah yes, there are no innocent victims, I dismissed that thing. " That is exactly what terrorists say, what they think, what identifies them. There are no innocents, because that's the best way to dehumanize individuals to their eyes and justify anything. These are simply objects, or serving as military targets, for political purposes.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 23 janvier 2012 - 08:42 .

[TEWR]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

That bomb he made could easily be assembled by a non-mage. Any fool in Thedas could see that. All it took were some ingredients which do not require a mage.

That bomb was clearly beyond a simple explosive.  Mundane explosions don't act like that.

He probably just added a few other ingredients to amplify it. Possibly lyrium or fire crystals or whatever else. I highly doubt that he actually used magic on the recipe.

And if that is indeed the case, then any non-mage could still assemble it.

Or you know, rule of cool and all that.

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I've already argued this point too many times (even in this very thread) to make me want to even think about doing it again.

However, there was no war. Anders blew up a building, then later took credit for it, spouting a reason for it. There was no formal declaration of war, no warning, no thought given to civilian casualties.

There's a word for that. And its not war

The war had been going on for centuries behind closed doors. It was a secret war fought between the Mages and Templars without the public's knowledge.

Anders never started the war. Meredith never started the war. Hawke wouldn't have even started the war had he taken an active role in the conflict.

They simply drew it out into the public's domain and exacerbated the conflict that had been going on for centuries.

[GavrielKay]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I've already argued this point too many times (even in this very thread) to make me want to even think about doing it again.

However, there was no war. Anders blew up a building, then later took credit for it, spouting a reason for it. There was no formal declaration of war, no warning, no thought given to civilian casualties.

There's a word for that. And its not war.

Formal declaration of war?  This isn't the modern world where someone can send a diplomat to the UN and announce that they're going to start bombing on the morrow.  You can even tell Cullen that something is going on and no-one cares.

A first strike (if it would even be called that, for those who accept Ethereal's arguments) is an act of war.  It's a declaration of war in itself.  Do we ever get to read Anders' manifesto?  Perhaps he declared war in there too and no one was paying attention. 

Anyway, I still don't care.  Anders either began it or continued it, either way it is war and people die.

[dragonflight288]

Sun Tzu would think it ridiculous and idiotic to declare any form of hostility before striking. That would give the enemy time to prepare defenses, meaning many more of your own men may die. If you're going to attack, mask it so it looks like you aren't, or are going to strike elsewhere.

Tactically, I agree with the methods behind the bombing. Politically, I believe the Circles need to be free of the Chantry, but the Chantry won't willingly give up any form of power over mages. Mages are born with unholy gifts and are just demons waiting to kill everyone (sarcasm).

Was there a better way? I believe there could've been. Was Ander's right? I'd say not completely. I don't just look at that Chantry, but I consider the Chantries we see in Origins as well. There were always innocents in them. A Farmer asking the revered mother for a blessing, templars, refugees. Alistair talks about orphans being given to the Chantry to be raised or outright abandoned (like him). I don't know where they house the children, but I would assume it may be in the Chantry.

Anders, fused with Justice, is fanatically anti-chantry and is all about freeing all mages. Anyone who says otherwise is outright ignoring his entire storyline. Is he a good man? Yeah. Does he have faults? Of course. Did he come to terms with the bombing himself or was it Justice/Vengeance? Depends on the Rivalry and Friendship.

He was also growing incredibly paranoid, outright accusing Aveline in Act 3 that she is supporting the templars. He likes it if we sell Fenris back to Denarius. He's all but hostile to everyone except friend Hawke and Varic. It's right there in the banter.

He sounds a lot like a certain Knight-Commander, paranoid, accusing others of crimes not there, creating a situation where the crimes do occur where they otherwise wouldn't.

Most mages turn to blood magic in desperation, especially when the Templars are attacking. All that would mean is proving the templar's right from their view, even if all that's going through their heads is that they have nothing to lose.

Anders created an environment where the templars could prove their corruption and Meredith walks right into it, ordering the destruction of the Circle when they weren't even involved with Anders' actions. And Meredith created a desperate situation for the mages, where it's either blood magic and hope to live, or outright death irregardless of guilt. Most mages would choose blood magic and a chance at life.

To the original poster, I say they are similar, but they are also very different. If you play with Anders being friendly, he tries lots of options over a decade before resigning himself to a bomb. Meredith just gradually goes paranoid and continually grabs more and more power than she should have any right to wield. *cough, acting-viscount, cough, trying to oust Aveline and take over the guard, cough*